Another trilobite for your opinions

[Archiveit]

Hello, and thanks to everyone who helped with my last trilobite that I had inquired about.  I had a bad feeling about it from the start, so I wasn’t surprised that it turned out to be mostly fake.  I have a few more trilobites here that I’ve acquired over the years that I was hoping to get some more opinions on, and if possible maybe get the species identified, as not all of them were identified when I bought them.

 

I'll start with just this one for now (I was going to post more, but I seem to have reached some file limit and can't post any more photos in this thread).  It is about six inches outstretched.  I am certain that it is at least partially real, as there is some good eye detail, but there is also some very obvious restoration work on one of the eyes, which indicates that at least some portion of the fossil is not original, and I was wondering if anyone can say which parts of this trilobite are original fossil and which are not.  Also, there is a split in the rock which divides the fossil in half at about the point where the cephalon meets the thorax (it looks further down from the bottom of the matrix, but from the top that’s where the crack is), so I suspect that this may be a composite.  Thank you

Edited May 16, 2020 by Archiveit

[Archiveit]

[Archiveit]

If you want more photos I can try to get them, but I'm not sure if I'll be able to post them or not.

Edited May 16, 2020 by Archiveit

[Fossildude19]

Moroccan trilobites are often broken when being found, glued back together, then prepped out. 

Aside from some weathering, this looks like a very nice, real trilobite. 

 

Can't help much with ID, other than it is a Phacopid.  Maybe Phacops?  

I cannot keep up with the Moroccan trilobite names.  

[Carboniferouspat]

I agree real with a small amount of restoration.

[Kermit72]

Looks real to me. Likely some variety of Phacops 

[aeon.rocks]

Judging by the eye and granulation it's a Drotops (maybe D. subornatus from Mrakib). Destroyed in preparation (most likely a very old preparation) and heavily weathered, not so well preserved already prior prep; restoration on right eye and some pleural segments.

 

It's sad when these amazing creatures are prepared like this, although understandable considering a well prepped one takes a lot of time and good prep-work is not so easy. Probably prepped decades ago, nowadays with modern equipment, despite fast commercial prep, these are prepped a lot better (often still too fast, but people prefer to pay thousands and hunderds of dollars for easy and a lot faster prepared shale bugs, than for a well prepared Drotops and other Moroccan trilobites, which require a lot more time). Despite all that, still a nice educational sample... The crack you mention is not a sign of composition, but as mentioned: most real trilobites are found by splitting rocks (not just Moroccan, USA, Rusian, Chinese bugs too) and are often glued together (that's normal in trilo-world). 

[Kane]

Agreed with Drotops, also on account of the size. Certainly a bit beat up, but these are becoming harder to come by these days given that the Drotops layer is not as productive as it once was. 

[Archiveit]

Thank you for your replies.  I feel a bit better that it's probably not a composite piece, and I'm not too upset about it being somewhat poorly preserved since I didn't really pay a great deal for it. 

 

Aside from the obvious restoration on the one eye, which other parts look like they contain restored material, like how much of the pleural segments seem original?  Thanks.

[aeon.rocks]

Quote

Agreed with Drotops, also on account of the size. Certainly a bit beat up, but these are becoming harder to come by these days given that the Drotops layer is not as productive as it once was. 

 

It's not as productive because it doesn't pay off to dig for and prep one.The market is littered with old fossil preparations (thanks to some greedy resellers, who buy cheap fakes and junk in bulk cheap, add a margin and resell with superlatives as natural and high quality) and unaware buyers and new collectors buy such "cheap" Moroccan trilobites, thinking they get a good deal. This Drotops was probably prepared in less as 1h, with a chisel and quick resto. A commercially prepared one around 20 hours, a good one easily 30-50 hours. A perfect one easily close to 100 hours just to prep, can't put a price on that, but for sure 20 bucks is already too much for one like in pics here, although Drotops subornatus from Mrakib are  not so common in commerce... 

 

 

Quote

Aside from the obvious restoration on the one eye, which other parts look like they contain restored material, like how much of the pleural segments seem original?

 

Complete right side pleuras seem restored: 

[Kane]

4 hours ago, aeon.rocks said:

 

It's not as productive because it doesn't pay off to dig for and prep one.The market is littered with old fossil preparations (thanks to some greedy resellers, who buy cheap fakes and junk in bulk cheap, add a margin and resell with superlatives as natural and high quality) and unaware buyers and new collectors buy such "cheap" Moroccan trilobites, thinking they get a good deal. This Drotops was probably prepared in less as 1h, with a chisel and quick resto. A commercially prepared one around 20 hours, a good one easily 30-50 hours. A perfect one easily close to 100 hours just to prep, can't put a price on that, but for sure 20 bucks is already too much for one like in pics here, although Drotops subornatus from Mrakib are  not so common in commerce... 

 

 

No, it is more on account of the layer being pretty much tapped out for many kilometres. 

[aeon.rocks]

3 hours ago, Kane said:

No, it is more on account of the layer being pretty much tapped out for many kilometres. 

 

The same was said for Hypsi, then then opened a new couche. The same was said for Acanthopyge, then they opened a new couche... The truth is more complex. A lot of such stories are reseller marketing-stories, like saying Olenellus from Nevada are extremelly rare bugs; for sure in the market however - because only 2 or 3 people dig there and because BLM land is off-limits. If it takes a few days to dig and find a complete one, the same could be said for a Drotops. Then there's prep-difficulty and prep-time differences... The difference in selling value does not speak in favour of Moroccan bugs however.

 

Moroccans are not stupid, why almost nobody preps Gerastos for 10 hours or digs for Scabrella? Why they got "too lazy" to dig for Drotops? They know very well what sites pay off digging and what layers prep more easily (and allow to work in a fast commercial way). The problem becomes when it doesn't make sense financially and that's also why we more and more often see only easy to prep fast Moroccan trilobites from couches with excavator access in the market nowadays available cheap. There's thousands more kilometers, but if you don't have the road for an excavator... The more you need to dig or the deeper you need to dig to get to the layers, the more time consuming it gets, more effort needed. Preservation issues need to be considered aswell, the deeper you dig, usually means less separation, less weathered rock, which usually means more trouble to dig and more prep-trouble and prep-time the deeper the bug is in the rock... A real Drotops (not Hypsi) from Mrakib was never a very common bug, but there's other sites where Drotops was found and Drotops couche in Issimoure (look at the position on the top...). We see less Drotops available because of the economic costs to get one vs. droping selling value due to all the "junk" cluttering the market (the first Drotops that hit the market sold for also well over 1000$ - a value well deserved and still cheap compared to all the work that goes in a good prepped Drotops, especially compared with some other non-Moroccan bugs; now why spend time to even dig, if some resellers nowadays are selling old stock "amazing drotops" for 200$ or even 100$ or less and buyers prefer a cheaper price than a real drotops or a good prep - 200$ is what a Drotops costs unpreped btw.).

 

All that said, a Drotops is still easy to get nowadays. But it's getting hard to get a very well preped one.

 

 

[Archiveit]

19 hours ago, aeon.rocks said:

Complete right side pleuras seem restored: 

 

Thank you.  It does seem to lack some of the more natural looking texture of the other side.  The information about the site and preparation is also interesting.  From the sound of it the thing that seems to give a trilobite most of its value is how good the preparation is, and I can certainly understand how putting dozens of hours of work into something can greatly increase its value.  How two almost identical specimens can, I presume, have vastly different prices based on how cleanly they are presented in the stone.  I'm curious just how much that relates to other things like rarity of a specimen, like in general if a poorly prepared rare trilobite would be more or less desirable than a very well prepared common one, though I realize this is probably a difficult question with a lot of factors involved.

Edited May 21, 2020 by Archiveit

[Jackson g]

In general rarer species will go for a higher price than a more common, available species. Of course there's a lot more into play with that pricing like the quality of prep, preservation, color, display/presentation, locality collected, size and more. At the end of the day beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

2 hours ago, Archiveit said:

like in general if a poorly prepared rare trilobite would be more or less desirable than a very well prepared common one

I think this comes down to personal opinion in most cases. I personally prefer good quality specimens. Quality preparation isn't always cheap though. Educating yourself on what is a good/poor and or a rare/common species would be a good practice, and the safest way to answer the question on a case by case basis (in my opinion). 

[aeon.rocks]

Quote

 From the sound of it the thing that seems to give a trilobite most of its value is how good the preparation is, and I can certainly understand how putting dozens of hours of work into something can greatly increase its value.  How two almost identical specimens can, I presume, have vastly different prices based on how cleanly they are presented in the stone.  I'm curious just how much that relates to other things like rarity of a specimen, like in general if a poorly prepared rare trilobite would be more or less desirable than a very well prepared common one, though I realize this is probably a difficult question with a lot of factors involved.

 

 

Without a good preparation, all you have is a rock! Or a rock in the shape of...  

 

That's how a Drotops looks before the prep, you don't see the cross section in this picture, but that's a rock!

 

Often it's the preparation that turns rocks, or fossils if you like, into scientifically important specimens or into works of art. Some might not agree, since by definition all fossils are remains of once-living things from the past... But those people tend to forget, that most of commercially available fossils are not interesting for scientific research or study also because of the mentioned fact, not just due to the fact that they are so common that some prefer if such common fossils are used in construction industry and ground to cement as to see them collected. 

 

So, yes, the value of fossils (not just commercial value) is in preparation aswell. There's some tiny/small fossils that require over 800 hours to prep with all microscopic details... On the other hand, often it's also the preparation, that turns fine preserved specimens into "worthless" decoration, but luckily most of the time that's true for scientifically non-interesting fossils. 

 

That's how a Drotops looks half-preped, still encased in rock...after a lot of prep hours:

 

 

How rarity relates is difficult to say. Marketing and uneducated buyers play a higher role as preparation/preservation quality or prep-time involved or rarity. And it all comes down to personal opinions. In other words, even if resellers say some fossils are rare, that might not be actually the case, but just marketing. And common fossils that can be prepared fast and easy (easy by professional prep standards) often sell better as common fossils that are difficult to prep or require a lot of time. In fact, good preservation often correlates with easier preparation. More as 90% of all fossils in the market are very common, despite the "labels", of course rare species are more valued, but in general: people can overpay a destroyed rarer old prepped Psychopyge, with all spines destroyed in prep and undeclared restored areas, compared to underpayed good prep of a common (but time consuming sticky prepped) Hollardops or a good prepped Psychopyge. It's the preservation and preparation that makes some species rare, not the specie itself, but try to explain that to people... In the end, all that matters is the fun and passion!

 

Furthermore! Sth. to think about, in regards to rarity and prep in commerce... It's not a coincidence that there are tons of Green River Fish available in the market, often damaged in preparation (as always there are exceptions too). Preservation is fantastic! Bone is hard, matrix softer, separation good. Access to the dig site easy. Despite that they are easy to prep (but require some time and a lab to prep perfectly) we often see more or less fast commercial preparation, sometimes even paint used to hide the "flaws", enhance the aesthetics... Regardless, to unaware buyers such common fish from Green river preped with acid or in fast commercial preparation still look nice. And they sell without complaints. Also, often GRF fossils from different layers are inlaid into bigger plates quite skillfully... In such cases it's the artistic value, that sells. No matter what the tricks behind such prepps are, we have to admit these inlaid plates often look fantastic as decoration. Of course no one complains about prep or art by such commercial preparation in US and EU. In case of Morocco yes, we always see questions about authenticity. Because to prep Moroccan bugs doesn't pay off in US, it's common "knowledge" that Moroccan fossils are fake, we got used to buyer be careful or buy from trusted resellers rules. The country known for fake fossils, has fantastic and very real fossils however and deposits far from tapped out. But often impossible to sell even very common good preped small species for 20$ or 50$ or even 100$ - there's a lot of effort behind the scenes. A lot more than to find and prep a GRF fish, or a shale NY Pachops rana etc.

[FossilDAWG]

54 minutes ago, aeon.rocks said:

 ...The country ... has fantastic and very real fossils however and deposits far from tapped out, but those are not available cheap, because it's impossible - there's a lot of effort behind the scenes. A lot more than to find and prep a GRF fish, or a shale NY Pachops rana etc.

Certainly Morocco is the source of many fantastic fossils! Also certainly it is only fair that the people who find and prep these fossils should be paid fairly for their efforts, and so the most perfect specimens, requiring many many hours to find and many many hours in the lab to prep, will be very expensive.  You seem very angry that specimens of lesser quality are available, though.  The market for the best specimens is somewhat limited.  I for one cannot afford to pay thousands of dollars for a trilobite, or a green river fish for that matter.  I have "study grade" specimens of a few Moroccan trilobites; I knew they were study grade when I bought them.  Almost all of my collection is self-collected and self-prepped.  However I wanted examples of some taxa that are not available where I collect, for comparison of morphological features and to better understand the taxonomy.  I am glad that I do not have to re-mortgage my house to indulge my interest in trilobite systematics.

 

Don

[aeon.rocks]

6 hours ago, FossilDAWG said:

 You seem very angry that specimens of lesser quality are available, though. The market for the best specimens is somewhat limited. 

 

 

 

I'm not angry that specimens of lesser quality are in the market... Not at all, just looking at the bigger picture. 

 

On the contrast, I think that's normal, just trying to explain, why that's so and that usually the price doesn't mean much. I don't mind if people pay a lot of money for 5h prepared Keichos, common low "study" grade megalodon teeth, ilegally smuggled common low "study" grade dinosaur eggs, inlaid fish or shale bugs etc or buy cheapest Moroccan bugs. That's not my buisness!

 

 Not angry at all, even if some sentences seem rough, I'm just trying to explain with my english. And hoping that it helps a few new collectors in avoiding fakes and getting scammed legally by thinking they get a sweet deal on quick preparations in circulation. There's cheap "study grade", there's "rare", which are no rare at all, only rare well prepped, but there's also half fake and destroyed trilobites selling to unaware collectors for exorbitant price (specific specimen for example in photo below, was sold for a 3 figure amount from a reseller in US, described with superlatives, just to make clear Moroccans had little to do with this type of scamming), thinking they got a sweet deal for half the price: 

 

 

I've heard the saying "I cannot afford to pay thousands of dollars for a trilobite... I have "study grade"..." many times over, also from collectors with nice collections and many commercial fossils, not of the cheapest kind.. I can't afford to pay thousands of dollars for fossils either, so I easily relate to these words and I don't have a house to mortgage, but that's no excuse to start scamming people or to say that well prepped Moroccan trilobites are too expensive to afford, when in fact are not and resellers are selling old preparations at 5-10x profit margins and collectors buy "affordable real, genuine fossils" from resellers who "only display scientifically accurate well curated descriptions" with a "liftetime warranty" and paper certificates for 3 and 4 figure numbers... I'm not angry that specimens of lesser quality are in the market, but I'm not happy to see they are used to scam. All the specimens below were sold out, from a reseller, who described them as "top quality, well prepared" and the prices for this old fast prep, far from top or well preped, were far from cheap or reasonable, very expensive:

 

 

This one is still available, a similiar one is sold out, for a similar exorbitant price, which easily rounds up to 4 figures... I would like to believe that people buy these because they can't afford a better prepped trilobite (but that's not the case) or are afraid they would need to mortage a house for a top specimen that actually looks well preped. I'm not angry that this used to be a beautiful trilobite specimen, just sad by the fact and to see such scamming - which is eventually also destroying the market, not only reputation of Moroccan trilobites and the unfortunate bug itself (couldn't save much there with further prep):

 

In replying to the question how rarity and prep reflect in value all I was saying is, that they often don't - and this is just an example - it seems to be normal to buy quick prepped, painted and inlaid GRF fish, so not sure why buying quick prepped and restored Moroccan trilobite or even Moroccan pizzas, should be considered any different, even if covered with shoe polish instead of paint. Certainly it "is only fair that the people who find and prep any fossils should be paid fairly for their efforts" (it helps Moroccans and many others put bread on the table) and that descriptions are fair, but even some resellers don't often "realise" or care about the difference between fossils requiring many many hours to find and many many hours in the lab to prep vs. fossils that are easy or quick to find/prep (or resell with more profit), which are often a lot more expensive (sometimes not just in prep hour rates) than the former... It's also unfortunate that some species are only available destroyed, difficult to get unpreped or are way more expensive than prepped, which defies all logic... I worked on many different types of fossils, still learning, based on that experience I'm just sharing my opinion.

 

I like Morocco! Trying to teach people about the differences and why, despite all the stereotypes about fake Moroccan fossils, especially trilobites, Moroccans are not the bad guys who sell fakes - in fact they work fairly cheap even when you think the price is expensive... In example, you could offer me 1000$ for a 150h prepped Drotops, and that's a lot of money, a lot more as resellers ask for one, but I would decline in a second, without thinking (some Moroccans probably wouldn't); if you offer me the same amount for a shale bug that preped in 15h, I would probably say yes, thanking you with a smile on my face, although that would be probably 2x less as I could sell it for in "your favourite auction site". And I bet you would be smiling too, thinking you got a sweet deal. Enough said.  All that said, demonstrates pretty well why well preped Drotops are in short supply, i think.

 

Although I sometimes find the fact that some specimens are destroyed sad, that's still a lot better and more educational value there, than leaving these fossils to erosion or turn them into dust in the industry... 

[Archiveit]

14 hours ago, aeon.rocks said:

It's the preservation and preparation that makes some species rare, not the specie itself, but try to explain that to people... In the end, all that matters is the fun and passion!

 

Thank you again for all your replies.  It would seem that not only does one have to watch out for fakes, but also lower quality specimens that are being passed off as something nicer than they really are.  As for the example I posted in this thread, I'm not overly concerned about its condition because I didn't really pay an exorbitant amount for it.  It looks nice on the shelf and I can now be satisfied that it is mostly original, so I suppose I got my money's worth.  I am hoping to pick up some higher quality fossils though as well, which is why I am trying to learn more about the market.  I acquired most of my current fossil collection around ten years ago and earlier, back when I had fewer financial responsibilities, but it was also a time when I was a lot more naive when it came to things like fakery and other questionable dealings in the fossil world, but I'm now starting to think about getting back into collecting, hence getting my stuff checked out, and I am also trying to inform myself about the types of things that collectors really desire in a piece.  Back then I pretty much bought whatever caught my eye. 

 

21 hours ago, Jackson g said:

In general rarer species will go for a higher price than a more common, available species. Of course there's a lot more into play with that pricing like the quality of prep, preservation, color, display/presentation, locality collected, size and more. At the end of the day beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I think this comes down to personal opinion in most cases. I personally prefer good quality specimens. Quality preparation isn't always cheap though. Educating yourself on what is a good/poor and or a rare/common species would be a good practice, and the safest way to answer the question on a case by case basis (in my opinion). 

Thank you.  What do you consider the best ways to learn about what is considered a good or rare species?  Are there any particular resources you would recommend, ar is it mostly just a matter of watching the market for a long time to familiarize yourself with what is there?

[aeon.rocks]

Quote

 It would seem that not only does one have to watch out for fakes, but also lower quality specimens that are being passed off as something nicer than they really are.  

 

It not only seems that way, that's how the market works and false descriptions about condition are more problematic than fakes itself - not only for Moroccan trilobites.

 

Personally I have nothing against restored fossils, if restorations are morphologically accurate and disclosed to the buyers. I have nothing against any quality fossils and it's normal that you would have more luck selling for whatever value, if you would go on advertising a trilobite like yours as "it looks nice on the shelf and it is mostly original" than saying "butchered old preparation, weathered and 30% restored (complete right side of thorax and right eye)", but if you would go on and price it for $$$ and describe it as top quality or well preped or 100% natural, that's another matter... I know my words sound harsh, but yes, it's a matter of years or decades, different personal opinions, collecting experiences, familiarizing yourself with what is there (not only in the market) and also learning the tricks... We all started as beginners, and a long time ago I thought most of the affordable Moroccan trilobites in the market were fakes (thanks to stereotypes), that's why I understand your confusion very well! Now I know that most are real, but there is still a lot of "traps" in the market for beginners, a lot of "rules", "tricks"...

 

If I guess that you probably payed less as $$ for it, less as $$$ for sure (from a Moroccan or a very honest dealer you would probably pay less as $$, so a 2 figure sum and up to 5x less), but a new and naive collector doesn't have experience about the different preparation, rarity, details lacking (which reveal a fast commercial prep or a good prep), pricing etc... Best way to learn is to read a lot, buy or borrow a book in the library, read online, there's plenty of websites and forums with good info about trilobites and also about trilobite preparation, seek information prior buying. If you have that kind of luck, find other collectors in your area, maybe some are interested in bugs too... Get familiar with species you are interested in, don't just buy on impulse. Eventually you'll learn that it's easy to recognize Moroccan fakes and good prepped trilobites from fast or butchered specimens. You might also learn there's plenty of resellers, but only a few good ones, who know what they are reselling. There's too many trilobites and different species... You'll learn, that this hobby is very interesting, if you don't just throw your money away for "rocks that look good on the shelf". 

[JohnJ]

@aeon.rocks

 

I understand you are just trying to illustrate your point, but please avoid using specific valuations.  Thanks.

[aeon.rocks]

Thanks for correcting them. 

[Archiveit]

9 hours ago, aeon.rocks said:

 

It not only seems that way, that's how the market works and false descriptions about condition are more problematic than fakes itself - not only for Moroccan trilobites.

 

 

Thank you again for your info.